Re: [ba-unrev-talk] Fw: [unrev-II] Dervin and Sense-Making
1) That's not the first point I was making about the inductive inference.
The point I was making there was the sense-making and mathematics per se
_might_ be two different kinds, and therefore the validity of the inference
is in question on that basis. (01)
2) I covered the H A Simon point. If you take the whole of the universe you
believe is out there as your data domain then your personal processing unit
just doesn't have the horsepower to deal with it by brute force (though see
point following). Agreed. (02)
3) But actually what governs the general sense-making relation is the *set
of metaphors of significance* that can be applied to the data domain by a
given amount of processing power (in an amount of time - if time is relevant
to the sense-making in question).
So if it has one metaphor, a bear of awesome brain might 'make sense' of the
entire universe of data in a very short time. (03)
Cheers,
Peter (04)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gil Regev" <gil.regev@epfl.ch>
To: <ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 4:17 PM
Subject: RE: [ba-unrev-talk] Fw: [unrev-II] Dervin and Sense-Making (05)
> Hi Peter,
>
> >No, I wasn't being sarcastic, (apologies if it seemed that way,) I just
> >trying to make a point about the nature of sense-making understood as a
> >heuristic.
> No need to apologize, I was just trying to show how, from your statement,
I
> couldn't figure out what you meant :)
>
> >Possible flaws of reasoning aside, what's a very important point for me
is
> >that it's all domain ('size') dependent up to a point (typically the
> >ultimate processing capacity of your brain and the nature of
> understanding).
> I agree but there's one more point, having to do with resources and
probably
> motivation. H. A. Simon's bounded rationality states that people do not
make
> decisions based on the exploration of all alternatives and their
> consequences because that would take unlimited resources even within a
> domain. Does the inductive inference hold for sense-making. I believe it
> does. No matter how much I wanted to make sense of your sentence, I had a
> limited time to do it because I have other things to accomplish during the
> day and I can't take 2 weeks to answer the question. (06)
1) That's not the first point I was making about the inductive inference.
The point I was making there was the sense-making and mathematics per se
_might_ be two different kinds, and therefore the validity of the inference
is in question on that basis. (07)
2) I covered the H A Simon point. If you take the whole of the universe you
believe is out there as your data domain then your personal processing unit
just doesn't have the horsepower to deal with it by brute force. Agreed. (08)
>Motivation also plays a
> role. How much time do I spend before I get demotivated by the search for
> sense and declare that it is either done or hopeless? (09)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Gil
>
> (010)